Liberal Forum

WTF is wrong with Harry Reid?

He is thinking of delaying the confirmation of the new Attorney General until after the new Congress is seated in January, because 1. there isn't enough time in the lame duck session and 2. Senate Republicans don't want Lynch’s nomination moving through the lame-duck session.

First of all, who gives a **** what Republicans want?
The Dems are still in charge until January.

As for not enough time, the 2010 lame duck session was one of the most productive ever.
Among the session's accomplishments on the Senate side were passage of:

* The tax cut compromise extending the Bush tax cuts, creating new Obama tax cuts and extending unemployment insurance (12/15)
* The repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy (12/18)
* The food safety bill (12/19)
* The 9/11 First Responders Bill (12/22)
* New START ratification (12/22)

And in 1998 the Republicans impeached Bill Clinton during the lame duck session.
So that's ****.

Reid has also signaled that he’s open to making a deal with Republicans to clear a finite list of President Barack Obama’s languishing nominees.
There are 35 nominated ambassadors, 16 lifetime judicial nominees and dozens of other nominees ready for consideration on the Senate floor.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/senate-dems-squabble-over-nominations-112727.html#ixzz3ItHnr2zC

They don't need Republican votes to approve these nominees, so why Reid making deals with them?
So maybe they won't be so hard on the Dems when they take control of the Senate?
ROFL, that'll happen.

RichClem » 12 Nov 2014 12:37 am » wrote:What does a troll call "freedom?"

You call it the right for large corporations to give it to us in the *** without any lube don't you troll?

Misty » 12 Nov 2014 3:15 pm » wrote:WTF is wrong with Harry Reid?

He is thinking of delaying the confirmation of the new Attorney General until after the new Congress is seated in January, because 1. there isn't enough time in the lame duck session and 2. Senate Republicans don't want Lynch’s nomination moving through the lame-duck session.

First of all, who gives a **** what Republicans want?
The Dems are still in charge until January.

As for not enough time, the 2010 lame duck session was one of the most productive ever.
Among the session's accomplishments on the Senate side were passage of:

* The tax cut compromise extending the Bush tax cuts, creating new Obama tax cuts and extending unemployment insurance (12/15)
* The repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy (12/18)
* The food safety bill (12/19)
* The 9/11 First Responders Bill (12/22)
* New START ratification (12/22)

And in 1998 the Republicans impeached Bill Clinton during the lame duck session.
So that's ****.
They don't need Republican votes to approve these nominees, so why Reid making deals with them?
So maybe they won't be so hard on the Dems when they take control of the Senate?
ROFL, that'll happen.

Reid is making deals because he wants something in return. He wants the normal rules put back in place, erasing the abuses he heaped on Republicans. He wants the ability to bring bills to the floor. To be able to offer amendments, and the ability to filibuster Presidential nominees.

You are correct that Clinton's impeachment happened in a "lame duck" session of congress, but the difference is that neither the House or Senate changed hands in who was in control.

golfboy » 12 Nov 2014 4:15 pm » wrote: Reid is making deals because he wants something in return. He wants the normal rules put back in place, erasing the abuses he heaped on Republicans. He wants the ability to bring bills to the floor. To be able to offer amendments, and the ability to filibuster Presidential nominees.

Yup. Reid is scared. He has got to know if he tries to ramrod **** thru in the lame duck using his rules the GOP just may do the same to him over the next two years.

And they should. For years the left has called this a do nothing congress. Well, it is now time to see what they can do.

RichClem » 12 Nov 2014 12:34 am » wrote: It's called competition, the way Capitalism works, moonbat.

Thanks for confirming you're a foul mouthed, brainless neo-marxist imbecile.

You **** A hole.

And here you are defending the Big Comm companies attempting to crush competition.

How far beyond Kindergarten did you get before you dropped out, dunce? I'm guessing 3rd grade.

Huey » 12 Nov 2014 4:17 pm » wrote: Yup. Reid is scared. He has got to know if he tries to ramrod **** thru in the lame duck using his rules the GOP just may do the same to him over the next two years.

And they should. For years the left has called this a do nothing congress. Well, it is now time to see what they can do.

Yes, it is.

How's Ebola doing?

Illegals still crossing the border?

Homos still getting their kinky on?

How many women had an abortion today?

Any bills hit the Oval Office yet?

greatnpowerfuloz » 12 Nov 2014 4:29 pm » wrote:
Yes, it is.

How's Ebola doing?

Illegals still crossing the border?

Homos still getting their kinky on?

How many women had an abortion today?

Any bills hit the Oval Office yet?

Now ozzie is frustrated because I did not make it about her,

Not concerned about ebola,

Don't care who sleeps with who,

Abortion is a women's choice and it affects well under half the population.

And ozzie still doesn't realize then gop does not control the senate until jan.

greatnpowerfuloz » 12 Nov 2014 4:26 pm » wrote:And here you are defending the Big Comm companies attempting to crush competition.

Do you understand that EVERY "big comm company" wants to crush their competition? That's called capitalism.
Why are liberals such economic neophytes?

And why hasn't Comcast already implemented this fee? Do you know?

golfboy » 12 Nov 2014 4:15 pm » wrote:Reid is making deals because he wants something in return. He wants the normal rules put back in place, erasing the abuses he heaped on Republicans. He wants the ability to bring bills to the floor. To be able to offer amendments, and the ability to filibuster Presidential nominees.

The abuses he heaped on Republicans? ROFL
It was the Repubes who abused the filibuster like never before.
Reid isn't going to get ****, so he's wasting his time.

GB: You are correct that Clinton's impeachment happened in a "lame duck" session of congress, but the difference is that neither the House or Senate changed hands in who was in control.

My point was, that if an impeachment can be done during a lame duck session, then surely there is time to confirm a nominee for Attorney General.

Misty » 12 Nov 2014 7:34 pm » wrote: Reid isn't going to get ****, so he's wasting his time. .

Now you are catching on. BTW barry ain't getting **** either.

crimsongulf » 12 Nov 2014 8:00 pm » wrote: Now you are catching on. BTW barry ain't getting **** either.

That's good. I hope they do nothing for two more years. I'm sure after that the country will be glad to hand them the White House.

Misty » 12 Nov 2014 8:04 pm » wrote: That's good. I hope they do nothing for two more years. I'm sure after that the country will be glad to hand them the White House.

Barry will now be in the roll of the one saying no, he doesn't have Reid to sweep stuff under the rug anymore. Gonna be interesting what he does when he has to veto killing the employer mandate after he has continuously delayed it.

Misty » 12 Nov 2014 3:17 pm » wrote: You call it the right for large corporations to give it to us in the *** without any lube don't you troll?

Here's a little hint, moonbat.

If I don't like a company's product, service, attitude, customer service, whatever, I dump them and go with their competitor.

What can do you do if Beltway politicians pass a law or regulation you don't like?

Does that give you a hint, you fawning, groveling, lying apologist for corrupt Beltway hacks?

RichClem » 13 Nov 2014 8:41 am » wrote: Here's a little hint, moonbat.

If I don't like a company's product, service, attitude, customer service, whatever, I dump them and go with their competitor.

What can do you do if Beltway politicians pass a law or regulation you don't like?

Does that give you a hint, you fawning, groveling, lying apologist for corrupt Beltway hacks?

more troll crap
this guy is a lying piece of **** as I have proven with the slightest room for doubt

Misty » 12 Nov 2014 7:34 pm » wrote: The abuses he heaped on Republicans? ROFL
It was the Repubes who abused the filibuster like never before.

Still telling that Democrat Talking Point Lie for a lying leftist Beltway hack?

You really like Beltway politicians to shove it to you, don't you.

My point was, that if an impeachment can be done during a lame duck session, then surely there is time to confirm a nominee for Attorney General.

Either he's sticking it to Obama as revenge, or his fellow Dems are.

Democrats are quite enraged at Obama.

Misty » 12 Nov 2014 7:34 pm » wrote:The abuses he heaped on Republicans? ROFL
It was the Repubes who abused the filibuster like never before.
Reid isn't going to get ****, so he's wasting his time.

Again, you ignore Reid's responsibility for the Republicans using the ONLY tool they had left available to them.
380+ House Bills, most of them bipartisan, that Reid didn't allow to come to the floor.
He didn't allow Republican Senate bills to be submitted.
He didn't allow amendments to bills.
So the only thing that Republicans COULD do, is use the filibuster. But of course it's THEIR fault Reid did these things.

Misty » 12 Nov 2014 7:34 pm » wrote:My point was, that if an impeachment can be done during a lame duck session, then surely there is time to confirm a nominee for Attorney General.

I understood your point. I was merely correcting you again.
Reid wants to remain relevant.
If he wants to do that, he has to give the Republicans something.

I thought you wanted compromise? Oh wait, I forgot that liberals define "compromise" as "Republicans giving liberals everything they want".

Misty » 12 Nov 2014 8:04 pm » wrote: That's good. I hope they do nothing for two more years. I'm sure after that the country will be glad to hand them the White House.

In your dreams. Lots of good bills will get through the Senate thanks to Dems who don't have a political death wish.

And Obama will even sign a few of them.

But mostly Repubs will set up everything for 2016, with Dems obstructing great legislation or Obama vetoing it.

golfboy » 13 Nov 2014 8:47 am » wrote: Again, you ignore Reid's responsibility for the Republicans using the ONLY tool they had left available to them.
380+ House Bills, most of them bipartisan, that Reid didn't allow to come to the floor.
He didn't allow Republican Senate bills to be submitted.
He didn't allow amendments to bills.
So the only thing that Republicans COULD do, is use the filibuster. But of course it's THEIR fault Reid did these things.

You don't really think that lying leftist will admit the truth, do you?

RichClem » 13 Nov 2014 8:48 am » wrote: You don't really think that lying leftist will admit the truth, do you?

more troll crap from the subhuman that i have proven without question is a lying piece of ****

Brattle Street » 13 Nov 2014 8:50 am » wrote: more troll crap from the subhuman that i have proven without question is a lying piece of ****

Says the lying piece of **** that said he predicted last Tuesdays slaughter.